Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion
Levinius system and Bilaren Prime These pages are misspellings of Livinius and Belarn Prime. The scene mentioning those two planets is from the "Fight or Flight" cut scenes on the ENT Season 1 DVDs. The spelling (Livinius and Belarn Prime) comes from the subtitles of that cut scene. It might be possible, however, that the subtitles are wrong (happens quite often with the DVD subtitles) and Mayweather actually said "Levinius" (a reference to Levinius V) and "Bilaren Prime" (a reference to the Bilaren system). We'd need a script of the episode to verify that, until we can get hold of it, we have to trust the subtitles, I guess. --Jörg 18:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC) *I think, delete these two. Add notes to Livinius and Levinius V saying that they might be related. Same with Bilaren system and Belarn Prime. --Bp 19:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC) *If from a cut scene Delete as non-canon anyway. Aholland 19:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC) *'Delete' both. Show no mercy. :P --From Andoria with Love 19:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC) *'Keep Levinius system' -- its valid as the system Levinius V is actually in, so the article should be rehabbed to reflect that reference. :*'Delete' Bilaren Prime but link to Belarn Prime from the background section of Bilaren system as a possible relation. -- Captain M.K.B. 04:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC) ::*About the Levinius system and something general I wanted to ask anyway: Only Levinius V is mentioned in the episode, not the system. Of course, every planet has to be in a star system (except if it is a rogue planet) put Levinius system was not mentioned. Do we create entries for every possible star system or only if it was also mentioned in the episode?--Jörg 10:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC) ::**in the past, many such entries were created, but without the assumption that the star of the system is named the same (for example: the Bajor system has an unnamed star, but the planets are numbered (Bajor VIII). I guess the system article might only be useful if there was more than one reference -- for example, you'd have to go to the Bajor system article to find a list of planets there. With Levinius, we now have one canon reference (Levinius V) and one "background info" reference that should be linked (the similarity with Livinius). I think the "system" article should remain to alleviate confusion. -- Captain M.K.B. 14:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC) *'Comment': If Livinius and Belarn Prime are only mentioned in scenes cut from the final episode AND their spelling is only known from the notoriously incorrect subtitles, then by all means move information contained on these pages to background sections of pages with a "correct" spelling. These two could then be kept as redirects... -- Cid Highwind 14:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC) :*Okay, it's time to do something about these two. I see quite a few suggestions (delete both, keep one and lose the other, keep as redirects, move info, add info to background section). I'm assuming, since both are non-canon anyway (they're not seen/referenced in the episode), that we delete these as well as those with the "correct" spelling and add the info as background to "Fight or Flight"? --From Andoria with Love 06:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC) Total conversion drive No such device was ever reference to my knowledge. The article is also unwikified, uncited, and unformatted. Jaz talk 22:39, 13 May 2006 (UTC) *'Keep'. To quote from the episode, "Sensors indicate some kind of total conversion drive." All the article needs is to be formatted & reworked. --From Andoria with Love 04:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC) *'Keep'. It actually did cite TOS:The Doomsday Machine, just not in the accepted way. --Bp 04:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC) *If it's quoted in the episode, Keep. The article has been formatted quite decently now (by Bp), so the deletion notice should likely be removed. -- Sulfur 13:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC) *'Keep'; it is directly from dialogue in the episode. Aholland 16:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC) **I stand corrected. I have removed the deletion notice. Jaz talk 19:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC) ::*I'm assuming that means you withdraw it's initial candidacy (sp?) for deletion. I think I've done that before, but I gotta wonder – can we do that? Or are we supposed keep this here (and the deletion template on the article) for the full five days? --From Andoria with Love 03:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :::*This article shouldn't have been nominated for deletion. It was unformatted but it did cite an episode and a novel. It was nominated only a few hours after it was posted. No one even responded to the discussion on the talk page and I didn't even have time to watch the episode to see if it was mentioned. I think "assume good faith" should have applied here. Also, IfD - Which JemHadar teenager? didn't get five days. I think it was supposed to have been a question of which one we should keep. There wasn't any discussion about it. --Bp 03:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :::The person who originally nominated the article for deletion has the authority to remove their own deletion message. -- Captain M.K.B. 15:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC) USS Titan dedication plague Non-canon. Jaz talk 19:33, 14 May 2006 (UTC) :Delete, but I would suggest that we move the comments to the background section of the books that it is relevant for. -- Sulfur 21:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC) :But I read the books and there was nothing about a plague... how many people do you think got sick at the dedication? (delete) -- Captain M.K.B. 22:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC) ::Ok, pretend that it's a "plaque" and that the creator put in a typo without realizing it. :) -- Sulfur 22:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC) :It should still be deleted. Jaz talk 22:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC) ::I'm not disagreeing with that, see above. I jusay that we should move the note to the novel's page. -- Sulfur 23:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC) :Delete; non-canon. Not even close. Aholland 23:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC) ::Sulfur is more right, actually, and I appreciate his paying attention to the viewpoint that we should try to preserve data. Which book was the dedication quote for the Titan decided on. This information belongs in the " References " part of that novel's article (vote: merge). -- Captain M.K.B. 00:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :::Since I wasn't sure which novel it came from (never having read any of them), I've put it onto the main page for the series: Star Trek: Titan. If that addition in the references at the very bottom of the page covers it well enough, then the merge is done and we can delete happily. -- Sulfur 00:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC) ::Actually "merging" refers to a process performed by an administrator where one article is deleted, the second article is moved to its place, then all revisions are restored. in this way, all edits performed continue to be contained in the article history. -- Captain M.K.B. 03:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :::I merged the relevant text (and there was only one editor besides the deletion notice). Sorry, I should've been more clear as to what was done. -- Sulfur 10:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :Delete, and be quick about it. --From Andoria with Love 10:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC) USS Garuda This ship and the accompanying article information is not in the final episode but comes exclusively from the script of DS9: "Shakaar". So the ship's name, class, personnel, and activity were neither shown nor discussed in the episode in any way. As far as the episode is concerned, the ship never existed. It is at best a series of filmed but deleted scenes (not just one), and possibly on-set script revisions that were never even filmed. Either way, the article is non-canon that should only be included in the background of the episode's article. Aholland 11:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :No vote just now, but you know... this was created by one of MA's founders. ;) --From Andoria with Love 11:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Even founders can . . . flounder from time to time. :) Aholland 12:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :Well, we still don't know if it's the founders' wishes that information from scripts and such not be used on MA as they've yet to comment on the issue. So, until such time as they object to it, I'd say we should follow the current canon policy and delete this – unless someone can come up with a good reason to keep it. --From Andoria with Love 13:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC) ::There is a recent thread at ten forward where it was decided to use names from scripts as article titles. So what about Eric Burton, etc. ? --Bp 15:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC) :::The difference is that Eric Burton, while unnamed, was seen. The script supplemented what was shown, not created things anew. The USS Garuda was not shown, was not in a list on an Okudagram, was not a model, was not a CGI, and was not referenced in dialogue. It didn't exist anywhere except in a version of the script that didn't make the cut. Eric was seen, though. To me that is a fundamental difference (as it is to the canon policy). Aholland 15:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC) ::::That makes sense. delete then. --Bp 17:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)